ArticlePloS one2026
In vivo rectal dosimeter with MRI marker.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHypofractionated external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer necessitates precise rectal dose evaluation. We fabricated a radiochromic polyurethane-based in vivo rectal dosimeter with a custom MRI marker and a patient-specific applicator for in vivo dose verification (IDV) during gated MR-image guided radiotherapy (MR-IGRT).
methodsThe dosimeter featured a radiochromic polyurethane active layer, incorporating leucomalachite green (LMG) and tartrazine. To accommodate anatomical variations, a detachable PMMA applicator was designed in five sizes. For localization, four elastomeric materials, including two polyurethane-based and two silicone-based materials, were evaluated as candidate MRI markers. Post-irradiation fading was assessed over time to evaluate measurement stability. A dose-response calibration was performed to establish a linear relationship between net optical density (OD) and absorbed dose. Furthermore, dose uncertainty was analyzed based on the law of error propagation. For verification, in vivo measurements were conducted for two patients and compared with TPS-calculated doses.
resultsVyta Flex 20 was selected as the optimal MRI marker due to its high signal intensity and ease of fabrication. Post-irradiation net OD showed a dose-dependent temporal response, and the readout time was standardized to 2 h. The dosimeter's sensitivity was 0.00253 cGy-1. Dose uncertainties were determined to be 2.1%, 2.0%, and 1.6% at 100, 200, and 300 cGy, respectively. In vivo verification showed mean dose differences of 3.7 ± 1.4% (95% CI, 0.1-7.3%) for patient #1 and 5.9 ± 2.1% (95% CI, 0.8-11.1%) for patient #2. Measured doses were consistently higher than TPS-calculated doses, suggesting possible contributions from localization uncertainty in high-dose-gradient regions and the material-dependent response of the radiochromic active layer.
conclusionThe fabricated radiochromic dosimeter with a custom MRI marker and adjustable applicator demonstrated preliminary feasibility as a proof-of-concept system for in vivo rectal dose verification during MR-IGRT. Further studies with larger patient cohorts and more treatment fractions are required to validate its reproducibility, statistical robustness, and clinical utility. Further refinement in positioning is also needed, particularly in dose-gradient regions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.